You had said that the idea of physicalism amounting to a "radical, brute separation of all things from one another" was a logical conclusion. — Terrapin Station
If you are not a "realist" on natural laws then you don't believe that the universe everywhere behaves in the same general ways re electromagnetic energy, subatomic particles, gravity, entropy and so on? — Janus
So there goes the identity. — Heiko
Every instance of a letter, number, etc. is unique. — Terrapin Station
What is unique? The ink or the brain-state? — Heiko
So, what in physicalist terms would the "properties of the particulars" be? — Janus
You say a letter is unique but the letter is not a letter, but a brain-state. — Heiko
Now I don't quite know what you want to hear. Their nature is expressed by the laws thereof. Tautologies do not always have ideal content. — Heiko
For example, the charge of an electron, the mass of a neutron, etc. — Terrapin Station
So, what is the mass or the charge of an electron if it is something other than the electron itself? — Janus
Why would it be something other than the electron itself? I don't understand why you're asking that. — Terrapin Station
Are they different? Yes, they're not identical. — Terrapin Station
And nontheless you know it is unique? If we were looking at the same letter the problem is quite obvious.What a letter is depends on context. — Terrapin Station
The development of their spatio-temporal relations. We are talking about "things"(Kant: "Ding"). Those are always physical.So, again I ask you what the laws that govern things, or their nature ( which is the same thing according to you) are as understood in physicalist terms. — Janus
So, again I ask you what the laws that govern things, or their nature ( which is the same thing according to you) are as understood in physicalist terms. — Janus
The development of their spatio-temporal relations. We are talking about "things"(Kant: "Ding"). Those are always physical. — Heiko
And nontheless you know it is unique? If we were looking at the same letter the problem is quite obvious. — Heiko
The other assumption would be that the properties of the particulars would be random. But why would we assume that? — Terrapin Station
By their nature, of course. You are very correct, the laws are derived from their behaviours. — Heiko
There are regularities, but not because of laws that somehow exist as an abstract whatever. — Terrapin Station
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.